Urfgurgle @ Urfgurgle @reddthat.com

Posts

0

Comments

8

Joined

2 yr. ago

In case you're serious

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charon

Technically yes, but we commonly refer to members of the House as congressmen/women and members of the Senate as senators. Being a senator gives you more power because there are only 100 of them compared to 435 House members, so it is a meaningful distinction to make.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_lady https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_lady

Many do, though the title is perhaps not used as often in most as it is in USA

What? The term "second lady" most certainly existed long before this.

Fair enough, I agree with you. Orwell lacked imagination and was waaay too focused on Stalinism to see what horror was already shaping in the West.

That's not what I said, nor is it something I ever would say. We have, in fact, seen "real communism," and we see it still today. The largest-scale example in history is the Ukrainian Free Territory, which functioned through a decentralized system of direct democracy at the community level. It lasted about four years during the Russian Civil War and was ultimately destroyed by Soviet invasion. For centuries, examples of communities functioning through mutual aid and other left anarchist principles have existed and continue to exist. I have personally visited several such communities and cooperatives, briefly living with one of them. Just because there is no "communist country" (which is an oxymoronic phrase) does not mean "real communism" has never existed.

Orwell was a leftist who wrote from a leftist perspective. 1984 is about Stalinism specifically and totalitarianism generally. It is not about communism, unless your definition of "communism" only includes the Soviet variety.

It's a line taken from Marjorie Taylor Greene, yes